[Leica] One Big Expensive Leica Lens

[mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner)]

...But 32x sounds a lot stronger to me than 21x...

I think I get to pay myself three bucks!

--------------------
Mark William Rabiner
Photography
http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/
mark at rabinergroup.com


> From: Howard Ritter <hlritter at bex.net>
> Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org>
> Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2010 09:16:27 -0400
> To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org>
> Subject: Re: [Leica] One Big Expensive Leica Lens
> 
> OK, here's the math:
> 
> The ABSOLUTE image scale on the film/sensor is about the same because the
> focal lengths are about the same.
> 
> But "magnification" is a RELATIVE concept. The question is, relative to 
> what?
> If the "what" is the image scale of the respective cameras' "normal" 
> lenses,
> then:
> The magnification of the Ridiculonar on the Hassy, whose "normal" lens is
> 80mm, is 1700/80 = about 21x
> The magnification of the Gargantumarit on a Leica, whose "normal" lens is
> 50mm, is 1600/50 = 32x
> 
> So, for example, prints made to the same physical size from full frames 
> taken
> with the tele lenses, or full frames viewed on the same monitor, will show 
> the
> subject 21 and 32 times as large as same-size prints from the "normal" 
> lenses.
> 
> ?howard
> (rits)
> 
> On Oct 9, 2010, at 4:41 AM, Mark Rabiner wrote:
> 
>> Will I'd think somebody could do the math and then they do and you're 
>> right
>> and I'm wrong I'll concede.
>> But my  money goes to Leica is going to have not a slightly more
>> magnification. But a lot more.
>> You read it here first.  Its in writing. Right here.
>> Prove me wrong I'll eat crow with Bosco.
>> 
>> --------------------
>> Mark William Rabiner
>> Photography.
>> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/
>> mark at rabinergroup.com
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information